Agent Washington
Softserve Ice Cream
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2017
- Messages
- 2,053
I saw some posts like this, looked at them for about five seconds, and low key just intuited that there won't be one for ISTJ, not just because of the sheer small number of SJs on this site, but also because we seem to be the sort who are like. "What issues? Why am I opening my yap about it instead of going about solving it?"
...On some other level, though, I do think it's not a bad thing to converse, and maybe gain some other perspectives from this act. Or just type shit out and occupy the time. There's benefits in thinking and verbalising.
I'll start.
Basically, I'm this basket of annoyances, (probably because SLI-Te - SLI-Si seems a lot more relaxed), and have a lot of trouble typing myself not because of the lack of analytic ability, so to speak, but because I compensate so much for intuitive functions that it's really not that difficult for me to grasp... I was gonna say "vague shit", but I'll go with "abstract concepts". In the process of typing, I've had to go through all this evaluation (whether I'm a really looping INTP, or whether I'm a looping ISTP, or if I'm an INTJ [That part was most certainly rejected because I know so many of them and they're just. Pffft I love those salty bastards you know]. ISTP because of the tertiary position Ni occupies in the stack alongside Ti; the ability to shut out pain and sensory inconveniences in an Se Aux, for instance, while still being the masters of Ti - that sounded quite nice, all in all.
Now, descriptions for ISTJ really aren't compelling, and honestly a lot of ISTJs don't exactly help, mainly because we're this small number in the community full of its prejudices against "Sensors", and also, these people have a way of putting things that makes people want to snore (Well, me, mostly). It is perhaps because we're SJs that, if we don't use this sort of language and try and establish a certain sort of credibility, in proving we understand these concepts... etc etc. I think that's the case, at least. Why is this not Ni? Ni just knows. But Si knows because it's seen so many examples of this kind of impulse before.
And then there's the typing of all the philosophers. Marx was clearly INTJ, so it went, as was Ayn Rand and so on. So maybe they clearly need to get into a duel to see who's the Ultimate INTJ Philosopher, masters of all Ni-Te. Jokes aside, the point is that people don't really type either a literary figure, or a philosopher, as Si or Se unless it's really bloody obvious, like in the case of Hemingway and Tolkien, where there's this rich repertoire of other life activities that they can look into. This kinda puts me in a very strange position because as long as I can remember, the realm of ideas and knowlege - I don't presume to say I'm the best at it, but I'll say with great certainty it's my area of competence, and honestly, if a lot of people are acting smug about it I want to punch them upside the jaw out of a sense of commitment to integrity. Anyway, the point is - it's just something that's familiar to me for as far as I know. I'm not saying I'm better, and I morally oppose those who say it's better. But that's not the point at all.
As a side note: What about philosophers who were clearly dealing with "Sensor" data? As far as I'm concerned, if we're typing philosophers based on philosophical theory, there's very little to say that a lot of these ideas aren't necessarily "sensory" in nature, because there's just a certain primacy to empiricism. Heck, if we look at Heidegger, he's describing a mode of being in the world. How is that not embodied by Se in linguistic form? Or Slavoj Zizek - sure, he talks about alternate ideas and welcomes radical change, but that hardly means he's doing it because he sees the possibilities inherent in abstract concepts; a lot of his analysis are explained with specific, concrete examples, whether national or historical. This isn't to say that I actually am typing them, I'm just making a point. I make this point without typing them because I don't even have a lot of faith or strong belief in how far reaching MBTI is as a concept for analysing a lot of things. It's just a diversion.
We're just stereotyped as these little worker bees, doomed to sweep some intuitives' floors or something, and frankly, that's insulting. Not because floors need to be swept, but because another of the smartest person I know, whom reality hasn't been kind to, who never had the chance to go to school the way I did, is also ISTJ. If he had the opportunity to go to school, he'd fucking wreck all of these pretentious assholes' asses. But he'd do so, kindly, because he's a good person.
But the point is, life is bigger. All this thought about phenomenology has made me think that there is more to life than just abstract conceptions. And to be frank, I also find it insulting that menial labour is used to diminish those for whom it is their primordial way of being. I mean, shit, they're probably better at that than I am. Nothing like a grandmother to put you in your place and tell you you're sweeping the floor the wrong way, get on her level.
And floors still need to be swept. Don't fucking degrade that shit. What do these people do, live in a goddamn pigsty?
...On some other level, though, I do think it's not a bad thing to converse, and maybe gain some other perspectives from this act. Or just type shit out and occupy the time. There's benefits in thinking and verbalising.
I'll start.
Basically, I'm this basket of annoyances, (probably because SLI-Te - SLI-Si seems a lot more relaxed), and have a lot of trouble typing myself not because of the lack of analytic ability, so to speak, but because I compensate so much for intuitive functions that it's really not that difficult for me to grasp... I was gonna say "vague shit", but I'll go with "abstract concepts". In the process of typing, I've had to go through all this evaluation (whether I'm a really looping INTP, or whether I'm a looping ISTP, or if I'm an INTJ [That part was most certainly rejected because I know so many of them and they're just. Pffft I love those salty bastards you know]. ISTP because of the tertiary position Ni occupies in the stack alongside Ti; the ability to shut out pain and sensory inconveniences in an Se Aux, for instance, while still being the masters of Ti - that sounded quite nice, all in all.
Now, descriptions for ISTJ really aren't compelling, and honestly a lot of ISTJs don't exactly help, mainly because we're this small number in the community full of its prejudices against "Sensors", and also, these people have a way of putting things that makes people want to snore (Well, me, mostly). It is perhaps because we're SJs that, if we don't use this sort of language and try and establish a certain sort of credibility, in proving we understand these concepts... etc etc. I think that's the case, at least. Why is this not Ni? Ni just knows. But Si knows because it's seen so many examples of this kind of impulse before.
And then there's the typing of all the philosophers. Marx was clearly INTJ, so it went, as was Ayn Rand and so on. So maybe they clearly need to get into a duel to see who's the Ultimate INTJ Philosopher, masters of all Ni-Te. Jokes aside, the point is that people don't really type either a literary figure, or a philosopher, as Si or Se unless it's really bloody obvious, like in the case of Hemingway and Tolkien, where there's this rich repertoire of other life activities that they can look into. This kinda puts me in a very strange position because as long as I can remember, the realm of ideas and knowlege - I don't presume to say I'm the best at it, but I'll say with great certainty it's my area of competence, and honestly, if a lot of people are acting smug about it I want to punch them upside the jaw out of a sense of commitment to integrity. Anyway, the point is - it's just something that's familiar to me for as far as I know. I'm not saying I'm better, and I morally oppose those who say it's better. But that's not the point at all.
As a side note: What about philosophers who were clearly dealing with "Sensor" data? As far as I'm concerned, if we're typing philosophers based on philosophical theory, there's very little to say that a lot of these ideas aren't necessarily "sensory" in nature, because there's just a certain primacy to empiricism. Heck, if we look at Heidegger, he's describing a mode of being in the world. How is that not embodied by Se in linguistic form? Or Slavoj Zizek - sure, he talks about alternate ideas and welcomes radical change, but that hardly means he's doing it because he sees the possibilities inherent in abstract concepts; a lot of his analysis are explained with specific, concrete examples, whether national or historical. This isn't to say that I actually am typing them, I'm just making a point. I make this point without typing them because I don't even have a lot of faith or strong belief in how far reaching MBTI is as a concept for analysing a lot of things. It's just a diversion.
We're just stereotyped as these little worker bees, doomed to sweep some intuitives' floors or something, and frankly, that's insulting. Not because floors need to be swept, but because another of the smartest person I know, whom reality hasn't been kind to, who never had the chance to go to school the way I did, is also ISTJ. If he had the opportunity to go to school, he'd fucking wreck all of these pretentious assholes' asses. But he'd do so, kindly, because he's a good person.
But the point is, life is bigger. All this thought about phenomenology has made me think that there is more to life than just abstract conceptions. And to be frank, I also find it insulting that menial labour is used to diminish those for whom it is their primordial way of being. I mean, shit, they're probably better at that than I am. Nothing like a grandmother to put you in your place and tell you you're sweeping the floor the wrong way, get on her level.
And floors still need to be swept. Don't fucking degrade that shit. What do these people do, live in a goddamn pigsty?
